No. 5-99-0830 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ... - Appellate.net

that a disputed claim would be resolved under Illinois law, any more than one would expect
a court to apply Massachusetts law when a Massachusetts-based insurer adjusts the claim
of an Illinois policyholder in Illinois.
B. The ICFA Judgment Should Be Reversed On The Merits.
If the Court vacates the breach of contract judgment, it should automatically vacate
the ICFA judgment as well. The circuit court made clear that, in resolving factual issues
raised by the ICFA claim — including issues concerning the quality of non-OEM parts —
it would follow the jury’s verdict on the contract claim. R. 2474. Because the contract
judgment does not provide a basis for drawing universal conclusions about the quality of
non-OEM parts, the ICFA judgment cannot stand. But there are a number of other reasons
as well why the ICFA judgment should be reversed and the ICFA class decertified.
Moreover, because plaintiffs failed to prove that State Farm engaged in any deception in
violation of the Act, judgment should be entered for State Farm. 56/
1. The Court Applied The Wrong Burden Of Proof.
The circuit court erroneously applied a “preponderance of the evidence” standard to
plaintiffs’ ICFA claims, despite plaintiffs’ concession in their proposed judgment, C. 30170,
and this Court’s ruling that the proper standard is “clear and convincing evidence.” General
Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Grissom, 150 Ill.App.3d 62, 65 (5th Dist. 1986). The court did
not offer any explanation for its departure from controlling authority. Nor is there any basis
56/
The circuit court’s legal determinations, including its determination of the standard
of proof, are reviewed de novo, see Lucas, 175 Ill.2d at 171, and its factual findings are
reviewed to determine whether they are against the manifest weight of the evidence, see
Cornstubble v. Ford Motor Co., 178 Ill.App.3d 20, 24 (5th Dist. 1988).
-124-